It wasn't the hacking that put the movie on ice. It was violent threats against theaters, and theatre chain calculations that the potential revenues from the movie are not worth the potential risks.
Well, one the theater chains would face the brunt of the suits. Two, while I agree it's probably unreasonable to find Sony liable, the case would ultimately be decided by 12 panicky people.
First, you stated that "The hackers" are "IRL terrorists". The hackers did not threaten anyone, these "threats" according to any other (credible) source were allegedly from the DPRK. Perhaps you need to clarify?
WASHINGTON — American intelligence officials have concluded that the North Korean government was “centrally involved” in the recent attacks on Sony Pictures’s computers, a determination reached just as Sony on Wednesday canceled its release of the comedy, which is based on a plot to assassinate Kim Jong-un, the North Korean leader.
Second, if you really believe that the DPRK is going to launch attacks against US theaters you should purchase a globe. If you think that somehow we will have massive amounts of fake pilots storming planes to fly them into Star Theater, you should have your head examined by a professional.
I agree, the odds of a literal "9/11-style" attack using commercial jets are small. But it's credible to think that a determined group could unleash a wave of violence. It doesn't take many people to do what happened at that batman movie.
To your credit, I thought you were going to draw a distinction between "terrorists" as in those who commit acts of violence and "terrorists" as in those who make specific and credible threats to commit acts of violence. This argument is weak at best. It's true that the definition of "terrorist" is amorphous at best, and often stretched. But I think a fair definition is "someone who uses violence to achieve political goals". I would argue that squelching the movie is a political goal, because the whole controversy is about NK and Kim Jong Il. Further, I would say that the threat of violence can be just as effective as violence itself, without shedding blood.
umm... Sony just canceled the xmas release of The Interview because IRL terrorists threatened to blow up movie theaters in "9/11-style" attacks if they play the movie.
So yes, I would say that the IRL terrorists are in fact terrorists, while to my knowledge Sony has never threatened a terrorist attack to get what they want.
Although I think you're just trolling at this point.
yes, i know it was you. i'm pointing out a bit of hypocrisy in your ointment: we have two bad actors: Sony and internet hackers / IRL terrorists. You're saying it's right for IRL terrorists to attack Sony, but wrong for Sony to attack IRL terrorists. I can't get as excited as you are right now.
more simple than that. guess what the two hugest sinks that suck down water? one, rice (yes, growing rice in the central valley). Two, growing parsley to ship to china to feed to chinese cows as hay. wtffff??
we have enough water to grow rice and parsley to feed chinese cows, but i can't flush my toilet due to city regulations. way to go CA!
[data needed]. i don't know how much water falls in a rain storm. so I can't compare the water from the rain to the trillions of whatevers it says in the summary are needed.
second thought, maybe I can do this. the greater los angeles area is maybe 60 miles tall and 120 miles wide. 7200 square miles * 3 inches of rain = 0.35 cubic miles of water. that doesn't seem like much.
whatever, we're all going to shrivel up and die. ashes to ashes.
Slashdot Mirror
It wasn't the hacking that put the movie on ice. It was violent threats against theaters, and theatre chain calculations that the potential revenues from the movie are not worth the potential risks.
Well, one the theater chains would face the brunt of the suits. Two, while I agree it's probably unreasonable to find Sony liable, the case would ultimately be decided by 12 panicky people.
i test games all day too, but i don't get paid for it. also the games have already been released. i just finished testing far cry 4.
Sell me a non-DRMed file and I'll buy it.
lies. and yet you still pirate music even though it is non-drm and one click away.
First, you stated that "The hackers" are "IRL terrorists". The hackers did not threaten anyone, these "threats" according to any other (credible) source were allegedly from the DPRK. Perhaps you need to clarify?
from NYTimes:
U.S. Links North Korea to Sony Hacking
WASHINGTON — American intelligence officials have concluded that the North Korean government was “centrally involved” in the recent attacks on Sony Pictures’s computers, a determination reached just as Sony on Wednesday canceled its release of the comedy, which is based on a plot to assassinate Kim Jong-un, the North Korean leader.
Second, if you really believe that the DPRK is going to launch attacks against US theaters you should purchase a globe. If you think that somehow we will have massive amounts of fake pilots storming planes to fly them into Star Theater, you should have your head examined by a professional.
I agree, the odds of a literal "9/11-style" attack using commercial jets are small. But it's credible to think that a determined group could unleash a wave of violence. It doesn't take many people to do what happened at that batman movie.
To your credit, I thought you were going to draw a distinction between "terrorists" as in those who commit acts of violence and "terrorists" as in those who make specific and credible threats to commit acts of violence. This argument is weak at best. It's true that the definition of "terrorist" is amorphous at best, and often stretched. But I think a fair definition is "someone who uses violence to achieve political goals". I would argue that squelching the movie is a political goal, because the whole controversy is about NK and Kim Jong Il. Further, I would say that the threat of violence can be just as effective as violence itself, without shedding blood.
umm... Sony just canceled the xmas release of The Interview because IRL terrorists threatened to blow up movie theaters in "9/11-style" attacks if they play the movie.
So yes, I would say that the IRL terrorists are in fact terrorists, while to my knowledge Sony has never threatened a terrorist attack to get what they want.
Although I think you're just trolling at this point.
yes, i know it was you. i'm pointing out a bit of hypocrisy in your ointment: we have two bad actors: Sony and internet hackers / IRL terrorists. You're saying it's right for IRL terrorists to attack Sony, but wrong for Sony to attack IRL terrorists. I can't get as excited as you are right now.
You'd need offline viewing capabilities, and Netflix has said they will never offer that.
Why dou you need offline? Adjust.
Mod down for trekkie reference.
Mod down for Star Trek / Star Wars confusion.
Blah blah blah you voted for this policy twice.
It's true, I voted for democrats and/or repubs.
As somebody asked above, is it wrong when a vigilante attacks vigilantes?
You could always buy tickets to see the movie and then stay home. Best of both worlds.
Obama says that any man between the ages of 18 and 65 is not a civilian and fair game for Death From Above.
uber and the taxi unions are both part of the same hypocrisy.
except i don't know the area affected by rain, and I also only know my local weather not state wide.
how hard is it
Because technology changes much more quickly than real world analogs
lovely digital/analog pun, but i think you meant analogues.
the redness is caused by blood swelling to the damaged skin to flush out the dead stuff.
oh tahnk goodnes you saved us all. what elsee is in ur crystal ball.
more simple than that. guess what the two hugest sinks that suck down water? one, rice (yes, growing rice in the central valley). Two, growing parsley to ship to china to feed to chinese cows as hay. wtffff??
we have enough water to grow rice and parsley to feed chinese cows, but i can't flush my toilet due to city regulations. way to go CA!
[data needed]. i don't know how much water falls in a rain storm. so I can't compare the water from the rain to the trillions of whatevers it says in the summary are needed.
second thought, maybe I can do this. the greater los angeles area is maybe 60 miles tall and 120 miles wide. 7200 square miles * 3 inches of rain = 0.35 cubic miles of water. that doesn't seem like much.
whatever, we're all going to shrivel up and die. ashes to ashes.
Maybe uber can make the taxi unions an offer they can't refuse.
in five years this business will be completely legitimate.
we can go to the moon but we can't correctly identify a phallacy
open carry is legal in many states, and gets people's attention. it's in the constitution.